Binary Hybrid Artificial Hummingbird with Flower Pollination Algorithm for Feature Selection in Parkinson’s Disease Diagnosis

1. De Rijk, M. C., Launer, L. J., Berger, K., Breteler, M. M., Dartigues, J. F., Baldereschi, M., Fratiglioni, L., Lobo, A., Martinez-Lage, J., Trenkwalder, C., & Hofman, A. (2000). Prevalence of Parkinson’s disease in Europe: A collaborative study of population-based cohorts. Neurologic diseases in the elderly research group. Neurology, 54(11 Suppl 5), S21-23.

2. Goyal, J., Khandnor, P., & Aseri, T. C. (2020). A comparative analysis of machine learning classifiers for dysphonia-based classification of Parkinson’s disease. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics, 11(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-020-00234-0.10.1007/s41060-020-00234-0 ↗

3. Fahn, S. (2003). Description of Parkinson’s disease as a clinical syndrome. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 991(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07458.x.10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07458.x ↗

4. Politis, M., Wu, K., Molloy, S., Bain, P. G., Chaudhuri, K. R., & Piccini, P. (2010). Parkinson’s disease symptoms: The patient’s perspective. Movement Disorders, 25(11), 1646–1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.23135.10.1002/mds.23135 ↗

5. Rostami, M., Berahmand, K., & Forouzandeh, S. (2021). A novel community detection based genetic algorithm for feature selection. Journal of Big Data, 8(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-020-00398-3.10.1186/s40537-020-00398-3 ↗

6. Kale, G. A., & Yüzgeç, U. (2022). Advanced strategies on update mechanism of sine cosine optimization algorithm for feature selection in classification problems. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 107, 104506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104506.10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104506 ↗

7. Rao, H., Shi, X., Rodrigue, A. K., Feng, J., Xia, Y., Elhoseny, M., Yuan, X., & Gu, L. (2019). Feature selection based on artificial bee colony and gradient boosting decision tree. Applied Soft Computing, 74, 634–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.036.10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.036 ↗

8. Diaz, P. M., & Jiju, M. J. E. (2021). A comparative analysis of meta-heuristic optimization algorithms for feature selection and feature weighting in neural networks. Evolutionary Intelligence, 15(4), 2631–2650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-021-00634-6.10.1007/s12065-021-00634-6 ↗

9. Gupta, S., Abderazek, H., Yıldız, B. S., Yildiz, A. R., Mirjalili, S., & Sait, S. M. (2021). Comparison of metaheuristic optimization algorithms for solving constrained mechanical design optimization problems. Expert Systems with Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115351.10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115351 ↗

10. Ghasemi, M., Zare, M., Zahedi, A., Akbari, M.-A., Mirjalili, S., & Abualigah, L. (2023). Geyser inspired algorithm: A new geological-inspired meta-heuristic for real-parameter and constrained engineering optimization. Journal of Bionic Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-023-00437-8.10.1007/s42235-023-00437-8 ↗

11. Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R. C. (1997) . A discrete binary version of the particle swarm algorithm. In 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Computational Cybernetics and Simulation, Orlando, FL, USA, 4104-4108. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.1997.637339.10.1109/ICSMC.1997.637339 ↗

12. Mafarja, M., Aljarah, I., Heidari, A. A., Faris, H., Fournier-Viger, P., Li, X., & Mirjalili, S. (2018). Binary dragonfly optimization for feature selection using time-varying transfer functions. Knowledge-Based Systems, 161, 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.08.003.10.1016/j.knosys.2018.08.003 ↗

13. Hussien, A. G., Oliva, D., Houssein, E. H., Juan, A. A., & Yu, X. (2020). Binary whale optimization algorithm for dimensionality reduction. Mathematics, 8(10), 1821. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8101821.10.3390/math8101821 ↗

14. Wolpert, D. H., & Macready, W. G. (1997). No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.585893.10.1109/4235.585893 ↗

15. Dahmani, S., & Yebdri, D. (2020). Hybrid algorithm of particle swarm optimization and grey wolf optimizer for reservoir operation management. Water resources management, 34(15), 4545–4560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-020-02656-8.10.1007/s11269-020-02656-8 ↗

16. Wang, Z., Luo, Q., & Zhou, Y. (2021). Hybrid metaheuristic algorithm using butterfly and flower pollination base on mutualism mechanism for global optimization problems. Engineering with Computers, 37(4), 3665–3698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01025-8.10.1007/s00366-020-01025-8 ↗

17. Kaur, M., Kaur, R., Singh, N., & Dhiman, G. (2022). Schoa: A newly fusion of sine and cosine with chimp optimization algorithm for hls of datapaths in digital filters and engineering applications. Engineering with Computers, 38(2), 975–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01233-2.10.1007/s00366-020-01233-2 ↗

18. Zare, M., Ghasemi, M., Zahedi, A., Golalipour, K., Mohammadi, S. K., Mirjalili, S., & Abualigah, L. (2023). A global best-guided firefly algorithm for engineering problems. Journal of Bionic Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-023-00386-2.10.1007/s42235-023-00386-2 ↗

19. He, Y., Zhou, Y., Wei, Y., Luo, Q., & Deng, W. (2023). Wind driven butterfly optimization algorithm with hybrid mechanism avoiding natural enemies for global optimization and PID controller design. Journal of Bionic Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-023-00416-z.10.1007/s42235-023-00416-z ↗

20. Gutowski, N., Schang, D., Camp, O., & Abraham, P. (2022). A novel multi-objective medical feature selection compass method for binary classification. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 127, 102277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102277.10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102277 ↗

21. Kanan, H. R., & Faez, K. (2008). An improved feature selection method based on ant colony optimization (ACO) evaluated on face recognition system. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 205(2), 716–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2008.05.115.10.1016/j.amc.2008.05.115 ↗

22. Samarthrao, K. V., & Rohokale, V. M. (2022). A hybrid meta-heuristic-based multi-objective feature selection with adaptive capsule network for automated email spam detection. International Journal of Intelligent Robotics and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41315-021-00217-9.10.1007/s41315-021-00217-9 ↗

23. Sawhney, R., Mathur, P., Shankar, R. (2018). A firefly algorithm based wrapper-penalty feature selection method for cancer diagnosis. In: Gervasi, O., et al. Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2018. ICCSA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10960. Springer, Cham. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95162-1_30.10.1007/978-3-319-95162-1_30 ↗

24. Eroglu, Y., Yildirim, M., & Cinar, A. (2022). mRMR-based hybrid convolutional neural network model for classification of Alzheimer’s disease on brain magnetic resonance images. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 32(2), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1002/ima.22632.10.1002/ima.22632 ↗

25. Demiroğlu, U., Şenol, B., Yildirim, M., & Eroğlu, Y. (2023). Classification of computerized tomography images to diagnose non-small cell lung cancer using a hybrid model. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 82(21), 33379–33400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-14943-8.10.1007/s11042-023-14943-8 ↗

26. Bugday, M. S., Akcicek, M., Bingol, H., & Yildirim, M. (2023). Automatic diagnosis of ureteral stone and degree of hydronephrosis with proposed convolutional neural network, relief, and gradient-weighted class activation mapping based deep hybrid model. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 33(2), 760–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/ima.22847.10.1002/ima.22847 ↗

27. Siedlecki, W., & Sklansky, J. (1989). A note on genetic algorithms for large-scale feature selection. Pattern Recognition Letters, 10(5), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8655(89)90037-8.10.1016/0167-8655(89)90037-8 ↗

28. Hafez, A. I., Hassanien, A. E., Zawbaa, H. M., Emary, E. (2015). Hybrid monkey algorithm with krill herd algorithm optimization for feature selection. In 2015 11th International Computer Engineering Conference (ICENCO), Cairo, pp. 273-277. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICENCO.2015.7416361.10.1109/ICENCO.2015.7416361 ↗

29. Shunmugapriya, P., & Kanmani, S. (2017). A hybrid algorithm using ant and bee colony optimization for feature selection and classification (AC-ABC Hybrid). Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 36, 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2017.04.002.10.1016/j.swevo.2017.04.002 ↗

30. Mafarja, M., & Mirjalili, S. (2018). Whale optimization approaches for wrapper feature selection. Applied Soft Computing, 62, 441–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2017.11.006.10.1016/j.asoc.2017.11.006 ↗

31. Sayed, G. I., Hassanien, A. E., & Azar, A. T. (2019). Feature selection via a novel chaotic crow search algorithm. Neural Computing and Applications, 31(1), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-2988-6.10.1007/s00521-017-2988-6 ↗

32. Kumar, V., & Kaur, A. (2020). Binary spotted hyena optimizer and its application to feature selection. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 11(7), 2625–2645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-019-01324-z.10.1007/s12652-019-01324-z ↗

33. Mandal, M., Singh, P. K., Ijaz, M. F., Shafi, J., & Sarkar, R. (2021). A tri-stage wrapper-filter feature selection framework for disease classification. Sensors (Basel), 21(16), 5571. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21165571.10.3390/s21165571 ↗

34. Pashaei, E., & Pashaei, E. (2022). An efficient binary chimp optimization algorithm for feature selection in biomedical data classification. Neural Computing and Applications, 34(8), 6427–6451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06775-0.10.1007/s00521-021-06775-0 ↗

35. Rajalaxmi, R., Kaavya, S. (2017). Feature selection for identifying Parkinson’s disease using binary grey wolf optimization. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing Systems (ICICS 2017–Dec 15th-16th 2017) organized by Sona College of Technology, Salem, Tamilnadu, India. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3131662 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3131662.10.2139/ssrn.3131662 ↗

36. Gupta, D., Sundaram, S., Khanna, A., Hassanien, A. E., & De Albuquerque, V. H. C. (2018). Improved diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease using optimized crow search algorithm. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 68, 412–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2018.04.014.10.1016/j.compeleceng.2018.04.014 ↗

37. Sehgal, S., Agarwal, M., Gupta, D., Sundaram, S., & Bashambu, A. (2020). Optimized grass hopper algorithm for diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. SN Applied Sciences, 2(6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2826-9.10.1007/s42452-020-2826-9 ↗

38. Li, H., Pun, C.-M., Xu, F., Pan, L., Zong, R., Gao, H., & Lu, H. (2021). A hybrid feature selection algorithm based on a discrete artificial bee colony for Parkinson’s diagnosis. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 21(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3397161.10.1145/3397161 ↗

39. Rajammal, R. R., Mirjalili, S., Ekambaram, G., & Palanisamy, N. (2022). Binary grey wolf optimizer with mutation and adaptive k-nearest neighbour for feature selection in Parkinson’s disease diagnosis. Knowledge-Based Systems, 246, 108701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108701.10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108701 ↗

40. Fang, L., & Liang, X. (2023). A novel method based on nonlinear binary grasshopper whale optimization algorithm for feature selection. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 20(1), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42235-022-00253-6.10.1007/s42235-022-00253-6 ↗

41. Shehadeh, H. A., Jebril, I. H., Jaradat, G. M., Ibrahim, D., Sihwail, R., Al Hamad, H., Chu, S.-C., & Alia, M. A. (2023). Intelligent diagnostic prediction and classification system for Parkinson’s disease by incorporating sperm swarm optimization (SSO) and density-based feature selection methods. International Journal of Advances in Soft Computing & Its Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108701.10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108701 ↗

42. Gafoor, S. H. A., & Theagarajan, P. (2022). Intelligent approach of score-based artificial fish swarm algorithm (SAFSA) for Parkinson’s disease diagnosis. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics, 15(4), 540–561. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJICC-10-2021-0226.10.1108/IJICC-10-2021-0226 ↗

43. Ayaz, Z., Naz, S., Khan, N. H., Razzak, I., & Imran, M. (2023). Automated methods for diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease and predicting severity level. Neural Computing and Applications, 35(20), 14499–14534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06626-y.10.1007/s00521-021-06626-y ↗

44. Zhao, W., Wang, L., & Mirjalili, S. (2022). Artificial hummingbird algorithm: A new bio-inspired optimizer with its engineering applications. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2021.114194.10.1016/j.cma.2021.114194 ↗

45. Ramadan, A., Kamel, S., Hassan, M. H., Ahmed, E. M., & Hasanien, H. M. (2022). Accurate photovoltaic models based on an adaptive opposition artificial hummingbird algorithm. Electronics, 11(3), 318. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11030318.10.3390/electronics11030318 ↗

46. Hamida, M. A., El-Sehiemy, R. A., Ginidi, A. R., Elattar, E., & Shaheen, A. M. (2022). Parameter identification and state of charge estimation of Li-Ion batteries used in electric vehicles using artificial hummingbird optimizer. Journal of Energy Storage, 51, 104535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2022.104535.10.1016/j.est.2022.104535 ↗

47. Sadoun, A. M., Najjar, I. R., Alsoruji, G. S., Abd-Elwahed, M., Elaziz, M. A., & Fathy, A. (2022). Utilization of improved machine learning method based on artificial hummingbird algorithm to predict the tribological behavior of Cu-Al2O3 nanocomposites synthesized by in situ method. Mathematics, 10(8), 1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10081266.10.3390/math10081266 ↗

48. Haddad, S., Lekouaghet, B., Benghanem, M., Soukkou, A., & Rabhi, A. (2022). Parameter estimation of solar modules operating under outdoor operational conditions using artificial hummingbird algorithm. IEEE Access. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3174222.10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3174222 ↗

49. Zhao, W., Zhang, Z., Mirjalili, S., Wang, L., Khodadadi, N., & Mirjalili, S. M. (2022). An effective multi-objective artificial hummingbird algorithm with dynamic elimination-based crowding distance for solving engineering design problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 398, 115223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2022.115223.10.1016/j.cma.2022.115223 ↗

50. Yildiz, B. S., Mehta, P., Sait, S. M., Panagant, N., Kumar, S., & Yildiz, A. R. (2022). A new hybrid artificial hummingbird-simulated annealing algorithm to solve constrained mechanical engineering problems. Materials Testing, 64(7), 1043–1050. https://doi.org/10.1515/mt-2022-0123.10.1515/mt-2022-0123 ↗

51. Fathy, A. (2022). A novel artificial hummingbird algorithm for integrating renewable based biomass distributed generators in radial distribution systems. Applied Energy, 323, 119605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119605.10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119605 ↗

52. Kıymaç, E., & Kaya, Y. (2022). A novel automated CNN arrhythmia classifier with memory-enhanced artificial hummingbird algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119162.10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119162 ↗

53. Yang, X.-S. (2012). Flower pollination algorithm for global optimization. In J. Durand-Lose & N. Jonoska (Eds.), Unconventional computation and natural computation. UCNC 2012. Lecture notes in computer science. (Vol. 7445). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32894-7_27.10.1007/978-3-642-32894-7_27 ↗

54. Wang, J., Li, Y., Hu, G., & Yang, M. (2022). An enhanced artificial hummingbird algorithm and its application in truss topology engineering optimization. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 54, 101761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101761.10.1016/j.aei.2022.101761 ↗

55. Ali, M. A., & SalamaAbdElminaam, D. (2022). A feature selection based on improved artificial hummingbird algorithm using random opposition-based learning for solving waste classification problem. Mathematics, 10(15), 2675. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152675.10.3390/math10152675 ↗

56. Mirjalili, S., & Lewis, A. (2013). S-shaped versus V-shaped transfer functions for binary particle swarm optimization. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 9, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2012.09.002.10.1016/j.swevo.2012.09.002 ↗

57. Jiang, Y., Luo, Q., Wei, Y., Abualigah, L., & Zhou, Y. (2021). An efficient binary gradient-based optimizer for feature selection. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 18(4), 3813–3854. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2021192.10.3934/mbe.2021192 ↗

58. Liang, J. J., Qu, B. Y., Suganthan, P. N. (2013). Problem definitions and evaluation criteria for the CEC 2014 special session and competition on single objective real-parameter numerical optimization. Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou China and Technical Report, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 635(2).

59. Beheshti, Z. (2022). BMPA-TVSinV: A binary marine predators algorithm using time-varying sine and V-shaped transfer functions for wrapper-based feature selection. Knowledge-Based Systems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109446.10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109446 ↗

60. Asuncion A, Newman D. UCI machine learning repository (2007).

61. Arizona State University’s (ASU) repository. http://featureselection.asu.edu/datasets.php.

62. Sakar, C. O., Serbes, G., Gunduz, A., Tunc, H. C., Nizam, H., Sakar, B. E., Tutuncu, M., Aydin, T., Isenkul, M. E., & Apaydin, H. (2019). A comparative analysis of speech signal processing algorithms for Parkinson’s disease classification and the use of the tunable Q-factor wavelet transform. Applied Soft Computing, 74, 255–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.022.10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.022 ↗

63. Little, M., McSharry, P., Hunter, E., Spielman, J., & Ramig, L. (2008). Suitability of dysphonia measurements for telemonitoring of Parkinson’s disease. Nature Precedings. https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2008.2298.1.10.1038/npre.2008.2298.1 ↗

64. Dolan, E. D., & Moré, J. J. (2002). Benchmarking optimization software with performance profiles. Mathematical programming, 91, 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s101070100263.10.1007/s101070100263 ↗